I could be wrong, but it seems to me that recruits are paying more attention to the academic ratings of schools. In that case, since Stanford is a better school than Michigan overall (I understand there are certain programs that we rank better in, but it is virtual consensus that Stanford is better ranked than we are), Stanford will be a strong competitor for the recruits that care about football and academic quality.

I know that Stanford has been doing well in football recently (and have won the Rose Bowl in this century), but entering into a long-term non-conference rivalry with Stanford would grant them legitimacy that I'd rather they not receive.

Also, they're not a traditional power, and I'd love for us to replace ND with someone a bit more long-standing.

These are schools that I think are worthy of a long-term association with us, comparable in class and academics. Possibly Florida as well. FSU and LSU - no way. Oregon is comparable only in microbrews and weed.

I could go for that if a couple Bay Area teams are included. First choice would be Stanford, otherwise my regional pick would be Cal-Berkley. Think we could beat on ‘em 3 out of 4 years and get good strength of schedule from it.

But to play along, I'd probably go with Stanford. Like institutions, across the country. Not sure I'd want to reward an every year battle to someone in the SEC, and when I think USC I think Rose Bowl. I guess we could play Stanford twice, as we've played them in Rose Bowls and it even happened once with UCLA, but everything else Stanford brings to the table would let me excuse it.

Texas would probably want a 2 for 1 or something demanding and ridiculous like they always do, and no one else really excites me. Really, someone like Nebraska or Penn State would have been a good replacement before they joined the conference.

We're pretty much the only team in the Big Ten who has favorable records recently against the SEC and favorable historical records. I think Ohio State is like 1-10 in their last 11 vs the SEC. We're the only one's saving the conference from total humiliation

Not true on Texas. They have 1:1 home and away scheduled with ND in 2015/2016 and 2019/2020. (might have years off by 1 but they have two home and homes) So it's doable even with a team from the north.

I'd be shocked if we can ever put another long term series together. It'd be great but I doubt most schools would want to commit to it. Count anyone in the SEC outside of Alabama and Vandy out, since the rest of them won't cross the Mason Dixon line. The ACC has Notre Dame so they're out. Stanford would be nice but I really don't see anyone wanting to commit to it.

Attention campers. Lunch is cancelled due to lack of hustle. Deal with it.

Most teams want at least 7 home games a year. The Big XII and the Pac-12 both play 9 league games, The SEC will probably go to that format sooner or later. That leaves room for at most one home-and-home with a non-conference foe.

Bear in mind that Florida and FSU already have an annual non-conference game with each other; Stanford has an annual game with Notre Dame that neither side plans to give up.

Another issue is that many of those teams probably prefer variety to the same opponent over and over again. Everyone wants to get on Texas's schedule, so they don't need the certainty of a common opponent every year. Their future non-conference home-and-home opponents include USC, Maryland, Notre Dame, Ohio State, BYU, Cal, and Arkansas.

Oregon has scheduled similarly: their future home-and-homes include Wyoming, Texas A&M, Virginia, Michigan State, and Ohio State. If this happens at all, it's going to be in the 2020s, not right away.

Lastly, it's worth noting that most of these teams play in warm-weather climates, where a September game is going to put Michigan at a disadvantage. That, at the very least, is one issue they didn't have to deal with when playing Notre Dame.

The idea of a long-term series with a strong opponent is a longshot, but I would vote for either UCLA or Texas, with the slight edge to UCLA. Why? First I eliminated teams who would likely not accept the offer due to current long-term series with strong OOC opponents (Stanford, USC, Florida, Florida State, and South Carolina). Then I eliminated teams with poor recruiting grounds (Arizona and Oregon). That leaves us with LSU, Texas, and UCLA.

These teams are all located in exceptionally fertile recruiting grounds. I think it would be harder to pull kids from Louisiana (since almost all the good talent there goes to SEC teams), so let's eliminate LSU. That leaves Texas and UCLA. Texas is a historical powerhouse, so that would be fun. However, if we played UCLA in Pasadena every other year, that would give us some familiarity with the Rose Bowl, which could be good for our team come the post-season. Also, UCLA is more similar to Michigan academically (two of the top three public research universities in the world--the other being Cal). It would also help with recruiting since players would be guaranteed to play in southern California two or three times in their career. Win-win-win.

Is there any real evidence that playing a road game someplace really improves your chances of pulling recruits from there? I know this is something coaches talk about, but to me it just seems like a relic of the old days when most games were only regionally-televised (if at all) and it was hard to really get exposure to teams outside your area.

"You will suffer humiliation when the team from my area defeats the team from your area." -- The Onion

I'd prefer LSU or Stanford. We go to Florida enough for bowl games (thought that might change a bit in the future), it'd be nice to get another bi-annual game in another fertile recruiting area. Louisiana or California clearly fit the bill. I know Texas fits this criteria as well...but I'd just prefer LSU/Stanford.

Founder and President of TDSETHPADS (Taze Drew Sharp Every Time He Pulls A Drew Sharp)

with all of these teams instead of picking one as a long term series. Since I have to pick one.... I choose Texas. Probably the college town with the best nightlife, it's not in Florida or California (where we seem to play all of our bowl games), a program with a lot of history (like ND) and definite recruiting advantages.

Looking at FBSchedules.com, the nearest open slot appears to be 2017, where Cinicinnati is the only non-conference opponent locked up. 2018 and 2019 have the home-and-home with Arkansas and then 2020 and 2021 have the home-and-home with Virginia Tech.

Like others, I actually find the idea of rotating some of these teams intriguing with the limited non-conference space that will be available starting in 2016 with the expansion to nine conference games for us. In 2018 and 2019, for example, with an SEC team already booked, it would be interesting to go with USC or Stanford, and then maybe in 2020 and 2021, perhaps someone like Texas.

If not a continuous series, then setting up a rotation with a few teams where most Michigan teams will see some of the better major conference opponents at least once in their Michigan careers might be interesting. If I have to choose just one, then probably USC with Texas as a backup.

"Funny isn't it, how naughty dentists always make that one fatal mistake."

We play the SEC enough in bowl games. Personally I'd prefer rotation non-conference scheduling with the better football teams in the other two more academically minded conferences (i.e., ACC and Pac 12). Stanford, USC, Oregon, FSU, Virginia Tech, Miami, etc.

We know the SEC oversigns. We know most of them have lower academic standards. We know they have highly compensated coaching staffs. If we sign up to playa against the SEC, it should not be against Alabama or LSU. Playing against lesser stack SEC teams early in the season will help build experience and momentum towards being able to compete with the SEC champion int he post season. Playing Alabama out of the gate sets you back the whole season, morale, injury, and perception-wise.

I'd much, much rather replace them with home-and-homes with several of these:

Georgia

LSU

Texas

Florida

USC

Oklahoma

Tennessee

The only teams of the above that we've played in the regular season are Georgia and USC, and the last time for those was in '65 and '58, respectively. Stone age, in other words.

I don't have much interest in playing the PAC-12 since it's been such a frequent source of opponents in the regular season or in the Rose Bowl. I suppose Arizona with RR would be "interesting" but I can't see that happening as long as DB is around.

“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." — Mencken

SEC teams are pipe dreams. No way in hell any good SEC team comes up here every other year.

I'd say Syracuse. Historical reasons. Michigan and Syracuse had a rivalry going when Michigan went independent in 1907. Quite competitive actually and it even showed in 1998-1999 when they played a home and home.

I kinda miss the old home and homes with Pac-12 teams. Look how many of them Michigan has played-

Florida State. They cheated us out of the Best Helmet poll, and the best Pregame Tradition poll. Plus, like ND, they are perennially overrated, and I'd love to benefit from derailing their anuual hype train instead of letting the NC States and Wake Forests of the world do it.

I like the debate but as someone above noted, I want my team to play more goddamn Big Ten teams. It's not as sexy as picking between a bunch of historic football teams across the country but, it's the truth. Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Illinois, Wisconsin, need to play Michigan more often than they're going to be.

Honestly though, any rivalry the university tries to develop will be hollow. We had a reason to hate Notre Dame. I don't think there's any other school in the country besides OSU, MSU, Minn (though how can you hate those cute little gophers?), and Notre Dame that can we just begin to hate. Each rivalry has its own traditions and reasons for a rivalry. I'm upset that we lose a rival, but I don't want to be like ND and have a rivalry against every team you face. I'm content wih 3, though I would like ND to be back on the schedule ASAP.

What about a team like Louisville? Kind of on the up-and-up, joining the ACC, and a bit of a media darling this year. I doubt they'll sustain this attention or production, but they're a decent major conference team where travel wouldn't be a big issue. I know it doesn't increase the recruiting footprint, but I think that is a little overstated anyway. They wouldn't be my top choice by any means, but they're realistic. It's odd that ACC teams in general aren't being thrown around (minus FSU). Clemson, Miami, GA Tech, VA Tech (I know we already have them scheduled) would also be decent options, if we're putting down the pipe dreams.

EDIT: To be clear, I would prefer the other teams in the poll, but as others have noted, they're pretty unrealistic in the short term. Also, I am on the West Coast, so I would much prefer a PAC12 team personally.

"And when we play as a team, when the old season is over, you and I know, it's gonna be Michigan again, Michigan."

or at least not one the fans would want. It will be an ever changing series of home and homes or nuetral site one offs for better or worse. I like the variety, and to hell with Notre Dame, but I think the schedule just won't be as good without the annual ND game.

Since Jimbo took over in Florida State, FSU has started to become another powerhouse in college football and haven't been too overrated in recent years. And don't you think we've had enough of playing an overrated team to start the season (Notre Dame with the exception of last season)?

We had some epic games with Bobby Bowden's teams in the 90s when I was hanging out with an FSU alumna, and now I live in Tallhassee. It would help elevate one of ND's new rivals in the ACC, and help elevate our own stature on the national stage. Two schools back on the rise.

86 and 91. Was at the game in 91. Michigan got worked. Bad. Terrell Buckley picked Elvis on his first throw for a 40 yard TD. Amp Lee was one of the fastest players I've ever seen at Michigan stadium and if it weren't for a few spectacular plays by Desmond it would have been brutal to watch. 31-51.

Stanford and Florida seem like sexy options not only with the current, thriving states of their football programs but from a recruiting standpoint as well. Both would be fun games that would bring in big revenue each year as well.

Big stadium, not too far (closest SEC school that isn't Kentucky), travels nearly as well as we do, contentious past (Manning/Woodson), big school who despite their current condition should "return to glory" (at some point).

that would be cool... Mainly because I live just outside of Knoxville, and because I'm tired of hearing of the "poised for greatness Vols" every season even though they look like they have a solid future ahead.

I vote Texas. Only because my selfishness overcomes everything in this vote, and I actually want to be able to watch the Maize and Blue play real live football fergodsakes. I don't care for UT, but Tejas would be a nice place to steal a few recruits from.

to be a Southern school, basically, in order to boost recruiting. UGA or Florida or UT would be my choices. West Coast could end up in a rematch in the Rose Bowl, and besides USC, there isn't a school that is really consistently good (Stanford has moments, UCLA was bad for a while, and who knows about Oregon?)

Of course, we should just be playing ND. Local rivalry with loads of history. Unfortunately ND is pretending that they actually have a rivalry with Stanford, and that their series with Purdue and MSU are more important than their series with us.

Among top ten wins all-time, but not at level of Bama and LSU. Two largest stadiums in the country. Manning vs. Woodson. Plus they'll beat us 3 or 4 out of ten times, keeping the rivalry close but in UM's favor.

With ND. Who would route for those chickens? Maybe they should join the Pac whatever ... that makes sense. Even though LSU is my backup team, since I spent so much time in NO the land of dreams, I'd play them alls. Until they play us ...

Both quality institutions that compare very favorably against ND academically, and they bring an extra dimension in that they already loathe each other. I think it would be great to have a home-and-away series where we play one of the two each year.

Total abstinence is so excellent a thing that it cannot be carried to too great an extent. In my passion for it I even carry it so far as to totally abstain from total abstinence itself.

That is why Notre Dame worked so well, and why Texas-Oklahoma, Michigan-Ohio State, California-Stanford, UCLA-USC, etc work as well.

For Michigan, there is no natural replacement for Notre Dame, so I wouldn't lock in another school.

However, there is another way to go. Private, excellent D-1 schools like Duke, Northwestern, Stanford, Wake Forest, Vanderbilt and Rice tend to schedule each other as they are facing the similar challenges and are essentially playing each other on an equal footing.

I would propose that Michigan do the same with excellent public schools and rotate among schools of Virginia, North Carolina, California, UCLA, and perhaps Texas.

the more I like UCLA. We probably get enough exposure in SEC country anyway, and there is probably more willingness on the part of West Coast kids to consider other schools than there would be anywhere else. USC and Stanford wouldn't do it because of the ND series, and there is enough similarity between us and UCLA that it could really get going as a thing.

There are a number of schools that might be on any list, but are unrealistic choices unless they change their own scheduling practices and/or conference scale back to eight conference games (not likely).

Programs that already have major non-conference opponent on an annual basis include:

USC and Stanford ( with Notre Dame)

Florida and Florida State

Georgia and Georgia Tech

South Carolina and Clemson

The Pac 12 and Big XII have nine conference games and the Big Ten will adopt that practice in 2016. The SEC is considering it and the ACC has gone back and forth on implementing that practice. So who's left?

1. Texas - UT has a four-game series with Notre Dame and has played Ohio State in a home-and-home series, so the Longhorns are a good possibility. Since the Big XII doesn't have a conference championship game, it makes sense for Texas to enhance their non-conference schedule in any possible. Having Michigan on the schedule would help accomplish that goal.

2. Oklahoma - Pretty much the same situation as Texas IRT their situation within the Big XII and the four-team playoff. OU probably doesn't have quite the same profile as UT, but they'd be on the list.

3. Miami - The U has occasional games with Florida, but UF isn't regularly on their schedule. For now, the ACC has an eight game conference schedule, so Miami does have more open dates to fill than other schools. ND has a series of games with them, so playing Michigan could also fit.

4. LSU - This is a program that Michigan has never played, so it would be unique to start up a long term series. Would it happen? Perhaps not with Les Miles as head coach, but some other HC and/or athletic director might be interested. If the SEC goes to a nine-game conference schedule, this isn't a likely scenario.

5. Tennessee - Two schools with large stadiums and large traditions. But like LSU, if the SEC goes to a nine-game conference schedule, a long-term relationship isn't likely. A home-and home might work out (same with LSU).

6. Texas A&M - Another SEC team that is expanding its stadium, plays in front of a passionate fan base and is located in a main recruiting area. They only other SEC team on the list would be Alabama, but it looks llike the Crimson Tide isn't more likely to have a neutral site game.

I"m not real excited about any of the Pac 12 teams outside of USC and Stanford. Washington could be a possibility along with UCLA. But given Michigan's history of not playing well on West Coast and the fact UM has actually played a number of P12 teams in the regular season in recent history. I'd like to see Michigan go in another direction (such as the home-and-home with Arkansas).

There aren't any ACC teams that are realistic possibilities outside of Miami. UM does have the home-and-home with Virginia Tech coming up. But none of the others that are realistic don't move the needle.